Findings, Challenges, & Lessons of Agriculture PER in Nigeria’s LGs

1. Findings, Challenges, & Lessons of Agriculture PER in Nigeria’s LGs Chinedum Nwoko Consultant, Abuja - Nigeria

2. Nigeria AGPER 2007: Organization & Scope • Four key Objectives • Establish a robust data base on public expenditure in the agricultural sector that can support credible empirical analysis • Diagnose the level and composition of agricultural spending in the recent past • Understand the budget processes that determine resource allocation in the sector; and • Draw preliminary policy recommendations for agriculture • Also: add value (agric PER context) to WB-led Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability Review (PEMFAR) • Coverage • Federal, three state governments, three local governments • SG: Bauchi, Kaduna Cross River • One LG per State: Dass, Birnin Gwari, Odukpnai LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

3. Nigeria AGPER 2007: Organization & Scope • Carried out by team from WB & IFPRI • Michael Morris (Task Team Leader and Lead Agricultural Economist, AFTAR) • Tewodaj Mogues - Research Fellow, Development Strategy and Governance Division, IFPRI • Simeon Ehui - Sector Leader, AFTAR • Lev Freinkman - Lead Economist, AFTP3 • Abimbola Adubi - Senior Agricultural Specialist, AFTAR • Primary studies by team of national consultants • Israel Taiwo, Louis Chete – Bauchi State + LG • Patrick Okonji, Caroline Nege – Kaduna State + LG • Caroline Nege, Chinedum Nwoko - FG, Cross River + LG • Funding by WB, DFID, CIDA … LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

4. Nigeria’s Local Governments • Third tier of government (autonomous …?) • Elected government • Chief Executive • Legislative councils • SGs controlled and organized elections • Funding arrangement • Mostly unconditional central revenue flows • Some SG funds • Largely underperforming tax sources • Functions: constitutionally suggested but SG defined • Constitutional autonomy but really SG controlled • HRM functions – hiring, posting, discipline, payrolling • Withholding of LGs funds to pay for • Some centralized LGs functions • Payment for some SG duties LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

5. Findings of 2007 Local Government Agriculture PERs

6. Acute Data Challenges • In most cases, paucity/non availability • Lack of properly organized records • Most basic information on budgets, accounts, production • Not available in LGs • Collected from State and Federal sources • Quantity and quality • Available records are incomplete and fragmented • Extensive processing time needed to make records useable • Little incentive for record keeping and organization LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

7. Local Governments and the Agriculture Function • No defined role but, some LGs • Still spend on agriculture • Include agriculture policy in strategy documents, e.g., Local Economic Empowerment & Development Strategy (LEEDS) • Extensive diagnostic analysis of sector problems in LEEDS indicate real potential for LGs contributing to agricultural development • However, inability to cost agriculture (and other) strategies limit their usefulness • Strategy document, in reality, not internally produced or owned (by LGs), but donor led LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

8. Very Little Agriculture Spending (1) • Low budgetary commitment • Untimely release of approved funds • Release of the small provision not assured • Sometimes, actual amount spent is less than what an average farmer would commit to his/her farm • Average annual funds release in one LG from 2001 to 2005 was N320,000 in constant terms (about US $2,500 at then prevailing exchange rate) LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

9. Low Priority of Agriculture Spending LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

10. High Volatility of Actual Spending; Fiscal Indiscipline • Erratic and unpredictable release of funds (quantity & timing) • Wide disparity between budget and actual spending on agriculture • Makes it difficult for policy implementers to predict agriculture spending or follow a defined work plan LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

11. Poor Quality of Spending • Spending not in areas of potential maximum impact or productivity • Thin spread of spending across several activities and functions • Spending or commitment policy/rationale not always clear • In one LG: bulk of spending was on agricultural extension and training • But the LG did not have extension workers in its employ and did not budget for such pending • Spending was on SG extension staff on State assignment LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

12. Problems with Fiscal Discipline & Accountability • Budget discipline • Poor budget planning • Inability to adhere to and implement budget • Excessive volatility and unpredictability of spending • Too much extra-budgetary spending • Average of 22 percent of LG funds not accounted involved • Unretired advances – salary, motor vehicle, touring, political office holders, etc • Payments for jobs not done, etc. • Audit surcharges LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

13. Unresolved Serious Audit Issues LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

14. What Will Make LGs PERs Work Better in the future?

15. In the Short Term (1) • Address lack of willing cooperation by LG staff – political, administrative, technical • Inability to appreciate objectives and essence of PERs • Some governments not happy to be mere case studies • Need for greater sensitization of LG officials in preparation and build up • Sensitization of FG/SG officials not nearly enough • What is in it for the LG? • Demonstrate direct, practical/tangible benefit or fallout to the LG • Lesson from PEFA assessment • Package exercise with small capacity building (training) component • Make steering committee active part of team that collect and assess data and draw broad conclusions – workshop setting • Couch study in terms of baseline for potential reform by LG LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

16. In the Short Term (2) • Identify and involve lead consultant early on in the process – initial meetings, etc • Ensures everyone is on same page ab initio • Reduces unnecessary misunderstanding/unreasonable expectations • Letter introduction has limitations • Demonstrate practicality of study • Package PERs as baseline study or harbingers for potential beneficial reform project/activity • Will reduce study fatigue and encourage future willing participation • Publicize result of PER at local level with local staff (lesson from PEFA assessments) LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

17. In the Medium Term • Donors may invest in data improvement – availability, quantity, and quality • Human capacity • Technical capacity – hardware and software • Demystify PERs (lesson from PEFA assessment) • Train LG staff to understand process and conduct diagnostic analysis • Useful to produce a simple toolkit/analysis guide • In depth analysis for consultant after joint agreement on broad findings and conclusions • Identify, work with, and help equip reform minded LGs – will challenge others LG Agric PERs - Lessons from Nigeria

18. The end Thanks